Limited Nuclear War Would Decimate Ozone Layer

New Scientist ^ | Catherine Brahic

[tbw2]

Short version:
One kid said that was horrible, it would kill everyone.
Dad: 1. Not if you do it right, and that’s where the modeling comes in. 2. Carl Sagan’s nuclear winter scenarios of the 1970s were overblown, and even he admits not everyone would die in a worse case scenario. 3. Another reason to model.
Other kid: Nukes are destructive, and should be destroyed.
Dad: then put them to good use saving the planet, since you think it needs it.
One of the kids: what if global warming is based on the sun?
Dad: Aricebo effect.
Other kid: what if the world actually starts cooling as a result?
Dad: go nuclear with the fuel, build up more power plants and keep everything warm. Use the same fuel in a positive way.
One of the kids: What if the global warming is solar based?
Dad: then you still need nuclear winter, or the aricebo from the dust clouds to cool us off.
Other kid: What if global warming is solar and that output decreases?
Dad: back to building power plants.

Did I mention: I wasn’t just an attendee, I was one of the finalists of the science fair. My project was more mundane: outwitting radar systems via materials and angles.

I grew up to do software modelling and data management system support. (And write science fiction on the side.)

[CholeraJoe]

The Tunguska Event in 1908 was the equivalent of 1000 simultaneous Hiroshima explosions and had a negligible effect on world climate.

The Krakatoa event in 1883 was estimated to have been the equivalent of 13,000 Hiroshima explosions. It lowered average global temperature by 1.2 degrees Celsius. Crop yields in the Northern Hemisphere were barely affected and in the Southern Hemisphere not at all.

What have these guys been smoking?